Comment on User "threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works" is banning users for downvoting his posts.

• Skavau@piefed.social ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Yeah, I mean it depends - doesn't it? If someone is expressing a text-based opinion post you dislike, I can see that. If you think the articles source is corrosive - I can see that. If you think its off-topic, I can see that.

  But supposing someone found a metal music community, and downvoted everything there because they don't like metal - would that be reasonable?

  source

  • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    That probably wouldn’t and would obviously be vote manipulation. This situation is pretty rare and is ignored, like on YouTube, because people get bored and most people wont go out of their way to do this

    Problem is: Lemmy’s algorithm is shit and doesn’t learn from our preferences. If it did, we would see less posts that we dislike

    People just can’t stand being disliked. Should we ban people disliking crypto posts? Because damn most of my posts are disliked based on people hating and spreading lies about crypto just because they dislike it

    source

    • Blaze@lazysoci.al ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Problem is: Lemmy’s algorithm is shit and doesn’t learn from our preferences. If it did, we would see less posts that we dislike

      Piefed has keyword filters that can help with that issue.

      source
    • Skavau@piefed.social ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      That probably wouldn’t and would obviously be vote manipulation. This situation is pretty rare and is ignored, like on YouTube, because people get bored and most people wont go out of their way to do this

      Absolutely, it is rare. But people do it. As I've said before, I banned 5 people on the original !television@lemm.ee instance for just downvoting posts repeatedly. No pattern. None of the accounts were active on the community n terms of posting. Some of the accounts had never even posted on the fediverse - they were simply downvote accounts that purely existed to vote negatively on content.

      Problem is: Lemmy's algorithm is shit and doesn’t learn from our preferences. If it did, we would see less posts that we dislike

      Piefed has much more control here. People can easily just block communities though.

      source
• SorteKanin@feddit.dk ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Why would I want to promote a point of view I don’t agree with?

  Because you also wouldn’t like those that disagree with you to essentially censor you. I.e. the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do to you. If you don’t want to be censored because of your personal opinion, maybe don’t do the same to others either.

  Now a downvote is not really “censorship”, but still, I would say you should still have respect for an opinion that is different from your own (provided it’s not a completely unreasonable opinion). That respect should be enough to prevent you from downvoting such an opinion, I feel.

  source

  • bold_atlas@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Downvotes are not censorship in any sense.

    source

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      They certainly are censorship in the sense that it reduces other people’s ability to see that content.

      source

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        That is not at all a reasonable definition of censorship.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Can you blame censorship when you’ve voluntarily decided to participate in a network that has a voting for visibility system?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I am free to disrespect them or their opinion, but I respect their freedom of speech

    Everyone is free to downvote me. This is not Reddit, having a lot of downvotes doesn’t ban you, unless you’re in a shitty instance

    source
  • FridaySteve@lemmy.world ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    But why does a platform have logins, persistent identity, and voting if the users aren’t intended to use that to moderate the conversation and push comments that they feel don’t belong in the discussion to the bottom of the thread and ultimately hide them? Why not present threads in bump order with users identified with a single thread ID inside threads?

    source

    • Juice@midwest.social ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This is so revealing, I always thought “why not engage with an opinion I disagree with?” Now I see that engaging with it might bring attention to it, even if it were to help us learn and teach.

      Instead people want to push the punish button, to be a nameless and unidentifiable avatar of hegemony. Our role in history is to suppress the ideas of others and boost those ideas which we’ve adopted. Hide what we are uncomfortable looking at, even if it is only an opinion, and let the people who control our own opinions continue to push their own agenda without obstacles.

      People actually want to remain ignorant, and not develop discourse; people want a closed discourse away from disagreement. When we create our logins, our online identities, we want to remain anonymous and detached from reality. We don’t want those who disagree with us to be considered human with differing opinions, because we don’t see our own opinions as human.

      Every interaction is a conflict, and conflict is hard, so I’ll punish this other person. I’ll play my part as a silent executioner, murdering ideas by consensus without a thought as to why I disagree, or why the other person disagrees with me. I’m powerless but at least I can take away someone else’s power.

      source

      • FridaySteve@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        I prefer platforms without voting buttons for this reason. People are treating the up and down arrows like “punish buttons” because of the result of pushing the button. Older forum and imageboard style platforms did not have voting. You couldn’t just push a button to register your disagreement, you had to actually make a comment if you didn’t like something, and other users could judge the quality of your response.

        In addition, your identity was often only relevant to a single thread, which was on a single topic, so your opinions weren’t portable or traceable. There were no profiles, so other users weren’t able to use your comments on different threads to try to accuse you of intellectual inconsistency. This led to more complex discussions because people are complex.

        Furthermore, on a platform like the one we’re on, if enough people click the “punish button” then the platform makes the comment less visible, requiring an extra step to be able to see it. The purpose of voting buttons is to shape discourse into what’s most agreeable, and homogenize it into what’s agreeable to the most people. Complaining about users “misusing” the voting buttons is something that happened a lot on reddit in the early years. People didn’t realize that they were working as designed.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You are intended to moderate via votes. But I hope you don’t feel that something you disagree with needs to be “moderated”. Other people are allowed to disagree with you, it doesn’t require moderation.

      source

      • FridaySteve@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Right that’s what I’m saying, I don’t understand why voting buttons are there except for users to use them to moderate each other. I don’t feel like they’re necessary at all. I participated in online discussions for 25 years before reddit showed up. We didn’t need voting buttons at all and the presence of those buttons removes nuance and complexity from the conversation.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I personally don’t see votes as a way to moderate, they mean much more to me

      source